mike rossi

You still have to draw a bow and that makes it much harder to avoid detection and get the drop on game. There might be some good arguments boding for crossbows, but I don't buy that one.

Doc, Did you watch the town hall meeting? I think the deer are safe from those guys - crossbow or 7mm with a lazer sight...... Besides, you hunt further than 150 feet from houses don't ya...

No, we didn't kill him or provoke him to rattle - if he did rattle on his own we would have video taped it. We snapped a few pictures and it didn't move at all , which is what they do a lot of times. We found him in the southern tier, I don't want to get specific because of their conservation status. (we don't hunt bears, so its not about that). They are not terribly uncommon, but this was the biggest one I ever came across in the wild. As far as aging them, water weasel is correct. It is a rule of thumb to multiply the number of rattles by 1.4 to get an estimate of age. The rattles break off and the rate of shedding varies so its just a rough estimate. You can tell sex by counting the marks on its tail (not the rattle, the black section before it). The males have more marks, but I don't know what the formula is, I don't have any reason to pick them up anyway, we counted the rattles by looking at the photos, by the way... Im sure this one was a male though , it was every bit of six feet long, the maximum length they are thought to grow, with males being larger.

Found this big timber rattler turkey hunting today on public land. 14 rattles so its about 19 years old or older. Shouldn't have put the camera away, walked about a quarter and intercepted a bear who stood up and posed...

Even if the numbers are exploding, that does not necessarily mean coyotes are impacting one prey species or another. During the last 10 to 20 years the DEC has cited a decrease in turkey numbers. But why during the same time period a long term decline in woodcock populations reversed. Woodcock are ground nesters just like turkeys, why did woodcock manage to turn around and increase under the pressure of coyotes? The reason is because research identified the problem and then those problems were addressed. The same logic can be traced back to the restoration, reintroduction, and introduction of turkeys - the coyotes have always been there yet under favorable conditions turkey populations took off and expanded their range, in spite of coyotes. When disease & starvation or other density dependent factors are not operating is when coyotes increase and subsequently disperse and expand their range. So harvest mortality would have to be additive to that natural mortality if not, it may actually increase populations. Consider if hunters are motivated or capable of a heavy enough harvest, even with a year-round season? If so, then consider the factors that could interfere with sustaining that harvest: loss of interest, ageing hunters, educating an intelligent animal... Then look at the geo-demographics, where are the hunters and were are the prey species in trouble - NY is a big state and there is no generic approach... Lastly, like I said, it is mere speculation that coyotes are impacting prey species. I am sure you can see that there are way too many contingencies to definitively say coyotes are impacting any prey or even if they are whether harvest is a useful or feasible tool. On the other hand, adding or restoring habitat a few acres at a time reliably produces sustainable, long term benefits. It could be that it is the turkeys that are not being managed properly, rather than the coyotes.

Nugent on dove legislation May 2013 http://www.mlive.com/outdoors/index.ssf/2013/05/wolf_hunt_accomplished_ted_nug.html Wolf hunt accomplished, Ted Nugent says Michigan should turn to dove season next Michigan rocker Ted Nugent talks dove hunting Michigan rocker Ted Nugent talks dove hunting. By Cory Olsen | [email protected] MLive.com on May 15, 2013 at 3:45 PM, updated May 15, 2013 at 4:23 PM GRAND RAPIDS, MI — You don't have to wait long to hear an opinion about wildlife management when talking to Michigan native rocker Ted Nugent. When asked recently about the newly approved wolf hunt, Nugent suggested the state take things one step further: A dove season. "We can hunt pheasants in Michigan, we can hunt quail in Michigan," Nugent said. "Grouse? Huntable. Woodcock? Huntable. There are more doves in Michigan than all those birds combined. The dove is the No. 1 game species, not just the No. 1 game bird on the planet, it's the No. 1 game species. The mourning dove generates more family hours of recreation than any species including bluegills." Doves were banned from hunting in 2006. The reason for Michiganders not being able to hunt them? Look to the history of the state's leadership, Nugent said. "This is insanity," Nugent said. "This is a holdover of the days of (former Detroit mayors) Kwame (Kilpatrick) and Coleman Young and (former governor) Jennifer Granholm that wouldn't know a mourning dove from a pterodactyl." A recently added piece of legislature, Bill 288, that Gov. Rick Snyder signed into law on May 8, will now put the power of designating game species as well as hunting seasons for those species in the hands of the Natural Resources Commission. That should help clear up any red tape holding back a dove hunt, Nugent said. "I'm pleased that scientifically educated professionals will now have the authority to make sure that the universally respected and utilized game species on the planet, that Michigan produces more of than Indiana or Ohio or Illinois, where you can hunt them, that we will legalize dove hunting." Outspoken about all things wildlife, Nugent said the revenue generated via people using hotels, grocery stores, restaurants and equipment could be huge for Michigan. "It's about damn time," he said.

Doc, it may be with coyotes, as other animals, the more you kill the more you get (Errington's Principle of Inversity). Unless as Elmo says, you knock the breeding stock down really far, then you will see a temporary population reduction. You would also educate many breeders and not only is coyote hunting low participation, hunting in general goes up & down in participation. But that's only part of it. The other part is whether or not coyotes are the population limiting factor to deer or turkeys. If they are not the game they kill might be partially or totally compensatory mortality - in other words killing the coyotes wont do squat... On the other hand, wildlife managers have other tools and the money to implement those tools that do work. Private conservation organizations have the same tools and money, even federal grants. Partner ventures between nonprofits & state wildlife agencies are the norm, not some radical idea. When I read (one week ago) online via a Buffalo newspaper, that someone described as the "former president of the NY chapter of the NWTF" is pushing for a year-round coyote season for the purpose of boosting turkey numbers - I shake my head. A couple days later I watch the crossbow hearing and someone with the same name representing a different organization is wrapped up traveling to Albany to testify on behalf of crossbows. I assume its the same Larry Becker... I am not taking a side in the crossbow issue, that is not my point. The guys younger then me and you need to wise up...

I believe they spend the winter indoors at county federation meetings.

What you are saying can mean different things... Of course you are correct that a deep enough cut into the breeding stock will reduce the numbers of the most prolific of species. But what if it isn't possible to take that many over a sustained period of years? With some animals, I am not sure if it is true with coyotes, a smaller breeding population is more "productive" than a larger breeding population. With those animals a very large take or harvest would have to be sustained year after year. Often animals (especially coyotes) get smarter or push back into areas were they are harder to take. Participation in hunting and trapping fluctuates. Any reasonable person would admit that predator control is likely to be a losing proposition. In the studies that show it being effective, it is done in a very structured way and during the warm months when fur is of no value and people do not like being in the outdoors, nothing in those studies suggests the results can be applied to sport hunting or fur trapping. Another thing to consider is if removing coyotes will even produce the desired effect or actually be counterproductive. Any number of things can come into play. Will the surviving animals simply eat better? Are the smarter animals which are harder to take actually the ones causing the problems? In the absence of coyotes will a more egregious predator expand? As sportsmen we need to support the DEC and private conservation organizations in managing wildlife with proven methods and refuse to advocate for other methods which are proven to be ineffective. As far as coyotes are concerned, regulations pertaining to problem animals are in place and otherwise the animal should be managed as a furbearer for trapping and trophy game for hunting. The public at large who do not shoot or trap and many people on this board do not live where they can regularly see, hear, or take one, and would consider one a trophy.

With all the woods/thickets/overgrown fields around, and she decides to make a nest right there by the road?? Really?? Undisturbed grass fields are vital to turkeys and other ground nesters. That would be the default nest site if it was available. But little grass is available early on. However 85% of the first nests are failed and the success of second nests is related to how much grass cover is available during re-nesting. Turkeys will breed into June (particularly re-nest) and the eggs take another 28 days to hatch. After hatching the grass is still important to the hen and brood for some time because the chicks need insects at that life stage and are somewhat less impacted by weather and predators ( including coyotes, lol ). Mowing or haying as late as possible and establishing cool season grasses which withstand snow and/or grow early in the spring will boost turkey numbers as well as other ground nesting birds and cottontails. Refrain from using pesticides and herbicides as well, the bugs are needed by chicks. Some people struggle with believing that those chemicals directly hurt the chicks & adults, but in addition to killing their food they do, of course, kill or compromise some of the birds as well. The majority of hunters who happen not to be land owners; can do their part by lobbying the DEC to "invest" part of the obese conservation fund in projects which increase and sustain turkey habitat. Volunteering and donating to private conservation organizations is also how it gets done; however, I caution against any nonprofit which will divert its donors' money away from habitat and spend it on predator control.

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. (AP) — A Democratic campaign office here usually would be quiet this time of year, a few weeks after the state's legislature wrapped up work and lawmakers headed off to summer vacations. But even though it's not an election year, the office is in full campaign mode, with volunteers working the phones and reviewing maps in anticipation of a new front of modern campaigning — the recall phase. A handful of Democratic state lawmakers in Colorado face recall petition efforts in what looks to be the first wave of fallout over legislative votes to limit gun rights. In an era in which recall efforts are booming, from governor's offices down to town councils and school boards, the Colorado efforts will serve as the first test of gun-rights groups' ability to punish elected officials who expanded gun control laws after last year's Aurora, Colo., and Newtown, Conn., shooting massacres. In Colorado, gun-rights activists wasted no time seeking recalls to oust state Senate President John Morse and three other Democratic lawmakers. The targeted lawmakers weren't necessarily the main advocates for ratcheting back gun rights, but all come from districts with enough Republicans to give opponents hope they can boot out the Democrats and replace them with lawmakers friendlier to guns. Colorado is the only state outside the East Coast to have adopted significant statewide gun controls this year. "Colorado seems to be the testing ground for some of the gun measures, so this has national implications," said Victor Head, a plumber from Pueblo who is organizing a recall attempt against a Democratic senator. Two of four recall efforts in Colorado already have evaporated from lack of support. But in Colorado Springs, Morse opponents are piling up signatures in gun shops and outside libraries and grocery stores. The National Rifle Association sent a political mailer saying it was coordinating the recall effort with local groups, though the local recall petitioners have denied that. The NRA did not return calls for comment on their involvement in the Colorado Springs effort. Morse has mounted a campaign to urge voters not to sign petitions. In an indication of the national stakes, that push is largely funded by a $20,000 contribution from a national progressive group called America Votes. The Morse campaign said the donation came through the group's local Colorado office. The recall group's main funding comes from a $14,000 contribution from a nonprofit run by a local conservative consultant, Laura Carno. She said that contribution was made possible by some out-of-state donors. "People in other states that are further down this road, like New York and Massachusetts, are calling up and saying 'What can we do to help?'" Carno said. "This isn't what Colorado stands for." In an interview, Morse seemed resigned to facing a recall vote after signatures are verified. He believes national gun-rights supporters are using his district to make a national statement about the political peril officials face if they take on gun control. "That's what's going on here. They want to take out the Senate president," Morse said. The organizer of the Morse recall effort, Anthony Garcia, didn't disagree. Garcia doesn't live in Morse's district but in the northern Colorado town of Brighton. Garcia said Morse was targeted not just because of his votes for gun control but because he's a prominent Democrat from a competitive district. "It's as much about saying Colorado is angry as it is about getting one guy out," Garcia said. "Legislators need to know when citizens are outraged that they can't ignore the people." Immediate accountability seems to be a common thread in recall attempts, said Joshua Spivak, who tracks recall elections nationwide at the Hugh L. Carey Institute for Government Reform at Wagner College in New York. Technology makes it easier to organize, Spivak said, and modern-day voters watching political activity in real time on Twitter and TV aren't content to wait until another election to show their displeasure when they feel ignored. Spivak said at least 169 officials at all levels of government faced recalls last year, up from 151 the year before. The number this year could go even higher, he said. Technology isn't the only explanation. "The other reason," Spivak said, "is that they succeed." Most recalls actually fail, as in the case last year of Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, a Republican who survived a recall election after attacking collective bargaining rights for state employees. But compared with re-election campaigns, when incumbents face up to 75 percent likelihood of winning, Spivak said recall elections have a much lower rate of success for incumbents. In Colorado last year, seven recall efforts made it to ballots, all local races, Spivak said. Of those seven, two officials were ousted and two more resigned. Nationwide, 108 recalled officials last year lost or left office after a recall. That makes the recall a powerful tool — and one likely to be used more often, Spivak said. Back in Colorado Springs, a couple of Morse opponents defended the recall attempt as the best way for citizens to keep their representatives accountable. "I believe in gun rights. And he didn't listen. He's supposed to represent the people, and when he doesn't do that, what are supposed to do? Nothing?" asked Bianca McCarl, a 40-year-old merchandiser who is supporting Morse's recall. Assuming the Morse recall goes to ballots, with an election to be held by late summer, the incumbent holds a slight party registration advantage in the district. He believes most voters liked his gun votes. He's counting on the support from voters like Joan Muir, a retiree who placed a pro-Morse sticker on her car bumper after seeing other cars carrying messages calling for his ouster. In an interview, Muir said she was dismayed by the recall campaign. "I live here. I'm for gun control," Muri said. "I don't care for guns, period, so they don't speak for all of us when they say Morse didn't listen to the people." ___ Associated Press writer Nicholas Riccardi in Denver contributed to this report.

Even though a permit is not required for a “damaging” coyote, a permit is required for a “nuisance” coyote. Refer to both 11-0523 and http://www.dec.ny.go...mals/81531.html 11-0523 6. Raccoons, muskrats, coyotes or fox injuring private property may be taken by the owner, occupant or lessee thereof, or an employee or family member of such owner, occupant or lessee, at any time in any manner. 8. No license or permit from the department is required for any taking authorized by this section. Nuisance Wildlife - A wild animal that may cause property damage, is perceived as a threat to human health or safety, or is persistent and perceived as an annoyance. Examples include a skunk or fox living under the porch or shed. If an animal is not causing any concern, for example, it is simply passing by, is observed only once or twice and does not cause any harm, then it should not be considered a nuisance. Damaging Wildlife - A wild animal that damages property, for example, digs up your yard, eats your landscape plants or vegetable garden, kills or threatens your livestock or pets, fouls your lawn, eats the fish in your pond, damages your home, etc.

I reread 11-0523 and see that section 1 has nothing to do with section 6, the part pertaining to coyotes. However, section 6 does indicate that the animal must be “injuring” property. To understand this you have to distinguish between the DEC definitions of Nuisance Wildlife and Damaging Wildlife, posted below. I retract what I said earlier about section 1 of 11-0523 applying to coyotes, However, even though a permit is not required for a “damaging” coyote, a permit is required for a “nuisance” coyote. The original poster indicated he was concerned about his pets and that after the first coyote there were more to go. If this was in NY... The grey area is whether staring at his pet is considered "threatening" - if yes the animal was "damaging" and no permit is required. If staring at his cat is not considered "threatening" than the coyote might be considered a nuisance which would require a permit to take. Since coyotes are predators, known to eat cats no less, in my opinion he was within the law shooting this coyote. But in regards to his comment " one down and many more to go; he is indicating he plans to take additional coyotes preemptively, which changes the character to "nuisance" therefore a permit is required to take additional coyotes out of season. Refer to both 11-0523 and http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/81531.html 11-0523 6. Raccoons, muskrats, coyotes or fox injuring private property may be taken by the owner, occupant or lessee thereof, or an employee or family member of such owner, occupant or lessee, at any time in any manner. 8. No license or permit from the department is required for any taking authorized by this section. Nuisance Wildlife - A wild animal that may cause property damage, is perceived as a threat to human health or safety, or is persistent and perceived as an annoyance. Examples include a skunk or fox living under the porch or shed. If an animal is not causing any concern, for example, it is simply passing by, is observed only once or twice and does not cause any harm, then it should not be considered a nuisance. Damaging Wildlife - A wild animal that damages property, for example, digs up your yard, eats your landscape plants or vegetable garden, kills or threatens your livestock or pets, fouls your lawn, eats the fish in your pond, damages your home, etc.

That is a canned hunt in which the birds were not housed and fed properly. In that circumstance it is not uncommon for the birds to consistently fly toward the nearest object taller than the surrounding cover, even if its a hunter or dog trainer. Wild bobwhites and properly handled released birds are much stronger fliers and much more wary than that. They need to take that video down before it is used to misrepresent wild quail or upland preserve hunting.

The DEC has a simple chart on its website showing when it requires a permit to take a nuisance animal. A definition of a nuisance is also given. Here is the link: http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/81531.html

Everybody who testified was in support of crossbows and nobody in attendance was in opposition. (If) I understand correctly; the hearing compelled them to move the bills to vote, but this voting will be highly influenced by the calls and letters they receive.

"If I get permission, I could start a recycling program for the huge loads of waste taken to the landfill," she added. "It could create new jobs and have a far-reaching impact on the planet." Jodi Arias, convicted murderer testifying at her sentencing May 2013. She sounds like Obama or any other politician. Why should we expect any of them to have any scruples?

Rick, I watched it with no particular interest in the issue, but every time someone testified with a conservation fund and/or federal trust fund argument, I would have loved to show them a recording of some present in that room testifying at an earlier hearing for a license reduction because the CF is too large and the DEC is doing less... Very notable how the senators who used that rhetoric in the license bill didn't flinch one bit with this inconsistency in testimony. Guess that's what it takes to be a politician...

Good call, I reread that article and learned the dec is doing a study like that, go to the last page (26) of this pdf article from their website. http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/wildlife_pdf/nyturkeyresearch.pdf They are going to study hens for 2 years, then possibly tweak the fall hunting zones, and then study another 2 years...

In this: http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/wildlife_pdf/nyturkeyresearch.pdf , the DEC devotes a lot of print to survival of hens. It says they will be studying that from 2013 to 2016 and use the findings to reevaluate fall hunting zones. They discuss other concerns they will look at as individual parts of a comprehensive plan, but this seems to be emphasized a bit more, at least that's the impression I get.

I think on the dec web page it does mention fall hen harvest as a possible issue, but I am not sure. They collect legs in the fall, mostly for age data which gives insight to population trends. Since they incorporate that "parts survey" into their analytics, I assume they are getting a fair amount of cooperation from hunters in reporting. Of course many people don't report, but the dec doesn't need very close numbers to predict trends, ie. is the population growing, shrinking, or constant. The biology literature, which guides or should guide management decisions such as hunting seasons, consistently advises against hunting immediately after the winter flock break up which coincides with the bulk of mating and gobbling. Assuming the May 1 date follows that, the youth weekend is smack center when it should not be. In areas were turkeys are down the youth season is questionable. In areas were hunters are complaining about lack of gobbling activity, the impact of the youth hunt on gobbling is not a far-fetched prediction either. Keep in mind, I am not disagreeing that the regular season misses the primary gobbling peak, that is not the point. Hunter density does effect gobbling, in no hunting zones the birds gobble their heads off. I hear you about natural predators suppressing gobbling, but I never read anything in the lit. about it, but that doesn't mean its not there or not true if its never been studied. That seems like a very complicated thing to model so I doubt it can be studied, but I never been the smartest guy in the room either... I think the dec also mentions hatch and survival as well. A lot of that hedges on the dreaded word "habitat" but it is also luck of the draw favorable weather. The dec also postulates even tropical storms Irene & sandy may have impacted birds. This all builds up to a simple reality: We have limited control over predators and zero control over weather events, but we can control how hunting seasons are structured and protect habitat.

Your opening another can of worms - conservation lands, those acquired for wildlife with trust fund money should be seasonally closed, at least by the end of spring turkey season. The DEC has sinage (signs) and some WMAs are seasonally closed, but its mostly politics rule. With millions of acres in the state & federal park system, the public at large doesn't need to be tramping all over conservation lands during critical seasons. The shed thing is another new challenge - that activity has grown to the point that former bird dog trainers are now training & selling shed dogs and writing books about training shed dogs. As this activity grows in proportion with trophy deer hunting, conservation biologists will need revised strategies. Back to the original thought, the youth season is still a variable the dec has a lot of control over. Besides, youth seasons were sold to us as a strategy to recruit youth into the sport. There has, as expected, been no indices published that show all these special youth seasons are actually working... At least they can do is move the youth season up to may 1 and put the regular season back. You seem to understand that conservation comes first regarding the regular season, but like the dec, make exception for the youth season. Not me, but anyway, I want to repeat what I said earlier, the youth hunt isn't even listed as a factor to explore, that makes no sense, especially with the time relationship between the start of youth hunts and the population drop...

For any reason different than what others gave on here?

Thanks and oops - the numbers are much different, I didn't realize that apparently was bow hunting harvest numbers. It also looks like the youth hunt actually started in 2003 not 04. That info, however, is not useful in assessing the impact of the youth season on the population status or the behavior of turkeys during the regular season. On the DEC website, there is a link discussing declining wild turkey populations in the state. The link gives some back-ground and then delves into the recent population trends in the state. They list about 10 different possible factors for the decline. I find a number of things interesting about this section. First, on some of the factors they place question marks (?). However, exhaustive study has not been done, and even after study, there usually is still "?". That makes me uneasy because knowing the thought-process of most sportsmen, most of them will hone in on the predator section, which really doesn't even make strong suggestions as given. 85% nest loss across the board to all kinds of ground-nesting birds is known, so the chart they include suggests very little. Second, there is no mention about the possible impact of the youth season which has a timing relationship with the notice in less birds. An index comparing the youth harvest data with other data over a timeline should be in that summary, why is it left out? Lastly, there are a number of other known factors not even mentioned. Believe it or not and like it or not; lead pellets on the ground are ingested by birds, including turkeys, and cause direct mortality, indirect mortality, or compromise reproduction. The same could be said for pesticides and herbicides. Some of PA's fracking brine may have already been (legally) used as road melt in NY. The onset of fracking also roughly coincides with the suspected decline in turkeys as well. The reasons the harvest data and the bird watching data suggest less turkeys over the decade can be any combination of things or just human bias. Human bias would be more hunters getting skunked or bad weather effecting bird watching, whatever. The whole situation may just be a normal population cycle. The DEC says it might just be population contraction. Each of those factors should be studied individually before a so-called meta analysis is made. When I read just Friday, that the past president of the NY chapter of the NWTF is suggesting to the legislature a year-round coyote season is the answer, I shake my head. Many hunters don't realize the operating budget of nonprofit conservation organizations is tens of millions of dollars and the great deal of good some chapters do when under honest & competent leadership. What was this guy doing while he was president? (he had the responsibility and means; to allocate , raise, or receive grants, to fund a study about the relationship between coyotes & turkeys - why didn't he, and now the state should change a law just because "of what he thinks?") < That is just insane... What level of understanding does he have about what he needs to know to function as head of a conservation chapter? The dec will need the political support of hunters and the financial support of nonprofits to study this properly, not a zeal of go after coyotes or other predators "just because". Maybe the dec itself doesn't have the right people in place, I doubt that though, I think they coordinate their communication to their audience (hunters) and standard of political correctness toward the audience as well. I have already cautioned on this forum about the people who are heading up our clubs and advisory boards and the mixing of politics with biology. IDK if it is incompetence or it reached the point of the dec being afraid of calling a spade a spade or what... All I can say is get informed and stay engaged in the issues...

http://www.nybowhunter.com/2008/05/record-harvest-for-youth-turkey-hunters.html